Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Alexa feature "do not send voice recordings" you enabled no longer available

discuss.systems

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 696 posts

Re: The Alexa feature "do not send voice recordings" you enabled no longer available

#41

Post by _ink_ »

gleenn wrote: post #11
Legend2440 wrote: post #8

TL;DR Alexa will be cloud-only very soon because it'll be powered by an LLM, which is too big to run on a smart speaker.

While the reason you suggest might be a good one, the repercussions of this change are clearly large. Unknowing customers now have their voice recordings sent to the cloud whoch could be leaked, have law enforcement get a warrant to take it from Amazon, or for it to be abused directly by Amazon. Those are huge. They might just have a good scapegoat.

Yeah, but why do people still trust corporations? It's not like this has happened for the first time. Quite the opposite actually. For profit corporations seem to have no moral compass whatsoever and will do anything do increase the margin. People should finally start to act accordingly.

Re: The Alexa feature "do not send voice recordings" you enabled no longer available

#42

Post by hiccuphippo »

DeathArrow wrote: post #40

If I buy a car and, after a while, the guy who sold me the car comes in the middle of the night and takes the wheels, isn't it theft?

If you buy the steering wheel of a car and rent the rest of the car and then the owner comes in the middle of the night and takes the wheels, is it theft?

Re: The Alexa feature "do not send voice recordings" you enabled no longer available

#43

Post by shakna »

hsbauauvhabzb wrote: post #38
Taek wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ToS have limits, people in a practical sense aren't really able to read and understand the ToS of every product they buy, which means a ToS can only go so far in the ways it allows companies to be predatory against consumers.

Has that been tested in court? I would have thought a user wilfully or negligently misreading a ToS would not be a good legal defence (not that I agree with how I think the law would play out)

Yes [0].

> Unless the website operator can show that a consumer has actual knowledge of the agreement, an enforceable contract will be found based on an inquiry notice theory only if: (1) the website provides reasonably conspicuous notice of the terms to which the consumer will be bound; and (2) the consumer takes some action, such as clicking a button or checking a box, that unambiguously manifests his or her assent to those terms.

Its part of why changes of terms generally require you to accept them, before you can continue using a service.

Unambiguous consent, and understanding of consent, are required, as ToS fall under contract law. Which does make most ToS... Unenforceable.

[0] https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-cand-4_20-cv-07...

Re: The Alexa feature "do not send voice recordings" you enabled no longer available

#44

Post by caseyy »

AndyMcConachie wrote: post #35

Am I supposed to have sympathy for people who bought a home snooping device now realizing they're going to be snooped on?

Yes. If, as a culture, we don’t stand up for consumer rights when a seller mistreats others, no one will stand up for us either.

Re: The Alexa feature "do not send voice recordings" you enabled no longer available

#45

Post by ohgr »

paul7986 wrote: post #37
october8140 wrote: post #27

Our longstanding privacy commitment with Siri https://www.apple.com/jo/newsroom/2025/01/our-longstanding-p...

As well another one is Siri after 14 years remain not intelligent even with Apple's supposed new Apple Intelligence!

It's terrible and always has been. As featured in Curb Your Enthusiasm (contains swearing so don't play it in the office loud): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTefnhbg0Ig

Re: The Alexa feature "do not send voice recordings" you enabled no longer available

#46

Post by KeplerBoy »

hiccuphippo wrote: post #42
DeathArrow wrote: post #40

If I buy a car and, after a while, the guy who sold me the car comes in the middle of the night and takes the wheels, isn't it theft?

If you buy the steering wheel of a car and rent the rest of the car and then the owner comes in the middle of the night and takes the wheels, is it theft?

It's certainly a violation of the rental terms.

Re: The Alexa feature "do not send voice recordings" you enabled no longer available

#47

Post by nitwit005 »

shakna wrote: post #43
hsbauauvhabzb wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has that been tested in court? I would have thought a user wilfully or negligently misreading a ToS would not be a good legal defence (not that I agree with how I think the law would play out)

Yes [0]. > Unless the website operator can show that a consumer has actual knowledge of the agreement, an enforceable contract will be found based on an inquiry notice theory only if: (1) the website provides reasonably conspicuous notice of the terms to which the consumer will be bound; and (2) the consumer takes some action, such as clicking a button or checking a box, that unambiguously manifests his or her assent…

The claim there is that they never saw the terms of service updates, and thus weren't aware of an arbitration clause, rather than terms of service generally not being valid.

Re: The Alexa feature "do not send voice recordings" you enabled no longer available

#48

Post by sorokod »

Legend2440 wrote: post #8

TL;DR Alexa will be cloud-only very soon because it'll be powered by an LLM, which is too big to run on a smart speaker.

There is nothing inevitable about this.

It a business decision to use an LLM.

It's a business decision not to beef up the Alexa hardware to support an LLM.

These decisions are weighted against reputational damage by Amazon with the outcome discussed here.

Re: The Alexa feature "do not send voice recordings" you enabled no longer available

#49

Post by evrimoztamur »

DevX101 wrote: post #3

Now would be a good time to have a functional FTC commissioner. Doing a bait and switch like on a product that was sold with a set of features should be illegal. If I buy a car and the sales guy stops by my house the next day to take back the wheels, it would rightfully be seen as ridiculous.

America's lack of customer protection will hurt continue hurting its people. Ladies and gentlemen, please do something about it.
Post reply on HN